Questions From Genesis (Part 2)

In Genesis 3, God asks several questions of His own after Satan asked the one that led to the downfall of mankind. The first of these was to Adam: "Where are you?" (v. 9). The purpose was to get him to evaluate what he had done and where he now stood with God, His Maker. Perhaps Adam thought he was being humble when he answered: "I heard Your voice in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked, and I hid myself" (v. 10). He may not have realized that he had given himself away as to where he was spiritually.

When playing chess with someone of superior skills there comes a moment that, as clever as you have been, you realize you have outfoxed yourself. When the other person makes a certain move, you say to yourself, "Oops! I made a mistake that I will now have to pay for." No doubt, Adam had that feeling when God replied to him with two questions: "Who told you that you were naked?"; "Have you eaten from the tree of which I commanded you that you should not eat?" (v. 11). Oops! Knowing that he had lost this round of matching wits with His Creator, Adam took the gallant course of action and blamed his wife (v. 12).

One person humorously said, "It's too bad none of that fruit is around today; some women need to eat it so they can realize they too are naked." Which brings up an interesting question: Why did Adam say they hid because they were naked—when they had sewed fig leaves to cover what are frequently called their nether regions? (Gen. 3:7). Believe it or not, several possibilities have been suggested. One thing is certain: They were either wearing the figs leaves, or they were not.

If they were not so "clothed," why were they not? One person suggested that what they sewed had fallen apart and therefore off their bodies; however, this explanation lacks merit. The word translated "sewed" is used three other times: Job 16:15: "I have sewn sackcloth over my skin"; Ecclesiastes 3:7: "a time to tear, and a time to sew"; and Ezekiel 13:18: "Woe to the women who sew magic charms on their sleeves…." None of these indicate unsuccessful efforts, and no reason suggests that Adam and Eve were too incompetent to perform such a simple task. Also, would not God have confronted them the same day in which they sinned? Their efforts would surely last a few hours.

Of course, having made them, and donned them, they might have decided to remove them. Before eating of the forbidden fruit, they were naked and unashamed because they were created in a state of innocence, as little children are when they come into the world. Having partaken of the fruit, however, their eyes were opened, "and they knew that they were naked." It was probably an instinctive reaction to cover up their nakedness. Perhaps, after a few hours they realized they were husband and wife and did not need to be ashamed, but Adam says they hid because of God.

Of course, God had made them and therefore knew all about their bodies, but who knows how quickly they were able to reason about such matters. Little children do not care about being naked; they're not embarrassed—until they reach a certain age; then they would be absolutely mortified to be exposed. So, Adam and Eve may have removed their leafy garb, but no compelling reason exists to think they did.

"But if they were still clad with fig leaves," some may wonder, "why say they hid because they were naked?" Of what did this "clothing" consist? The Hebrew word is usually translated "girdle," but it can also refer to an apron or a belt. In other words, it covers a very small portion of the body. So, even with one portion of the body covered, did Adam still consider that they were naked? Such is frequently the case throughout the Bible. There are three main words for naked, but they all seem to share the same definition.

The word in Genesis 2:25 is pronounced aw-rome' [6174], and it can mean "without a shred of clothing," as in Job 1:21, where Job refers to entering the world in a naked condition. However, it also can mean "ragged," or "barely clad," as in Job 22:6, where Eliphaz accuses Job of having "stripped the naked of their clothing." If someone is naked, it usually is pretty difficult to further strip them. The idea here is to take what little they had left upon them.

A third concept that the Bible makes is to contrast an outer garment with an undergarment, according to Strong. Neither Saul (1 Sam. 19:24) nor David were completely naked. In 2 Samuel 6:14, David is wearing a linen ephod, but Michal says of him that he was guilty of "uncovering himself…as one of the base fellows shamelessly uncovers himself" (2 Sam. 6:20). Likewise, Peter was not totally in the buff while fishing; he had taken off his outer garment (John 21:7).

All of these definitions have come from the word used of literal nakedness in Genesis 2:25. The word Adam uses in Genesis 3:7 is pronounced ay-rome' [5903], which certainly looks related to the other word. Both God and Adam used this word when the Lord confronted him. A third word is pronounced paw-rah' [6544], but it possesses a variety of meanings. Four more words are used—but only one time each.

In the New Testament, gymnos [1131] is translated "naked." A verb form [1130] is used only once, and the noun nakedness [1132] appears three times. The word family, according to Strong, has various meanings: "unclad, without clothing"; "ill clad"; "clad in undergarments only" with the outer garment having been laid aside; "nude (absolute or relative; literal or figurative)." Since both the Hebrew and Greek words have these definitions, could Adam be describing himself and Eve as naked even though they wore fig leaves?

It could certainly be a possibility; is it not the case that topless is considered nudity? Why could not Adam realize that they were not covered sufficiently and were therefore still naked? Perhaps this is the defining moment when being ill clad is described as "naked." If that is what Adam meant, God did not disagree with his choice of terminology. Besides, the exchange would border on the humorous if Adam had said, "We hid because we're nearly naked."

Whether they still sported fig leaves or not, God later "clothed" them with tunics of skin (Gen. 3:21). Three things are of importance in this verse. The tunic could be a shirt, coat, garment, or robe, according to Strong. Usually, it was an undergarment. It often had sleeves and covered from the shoulders to the knees—rarely to the ankles. This is God's definition of being clothed. What men and women wear in public as swimming suits are probably smaller than the fig leaves Adam and Eve devised.

The third point of note is that God had to slay innocent animals in order to make the clothing out of their skins. God shed the first blood on this occasion because of the sin that had been committed. A blood sacrifice would henceforth be required for a person's sins, culminating in Jesus, the perfect Lamb of God, being offered for the sins of all mankind (Heb. 9:12; 10:4, 12).

"Have You Eaten…?"

God's third question to Adam follows immediately: "Have you eaten from the tree of which I commanded you that you should not eat?" Once again, God is not asking the question to obtain information from Adam; He knows the answer already. What God asks is simple to comprehend; it is also quite specific. Adam cannot deny what they had done. Nor could he say that he had not been adequately warned. When God referenced the fact that He had given a commandment to Adam, the nuance of a forthcoming penalty cannot be missed. Adam would have probably liked to be anywhere else at this moment, but he passed the blame on to Eve.

"What Is This You Have Done?"

How many times could this question be asked to each one of us at various times in our life? When asked, we usually already know that we have made a major blunder that we will always regret. Eve could not have missed the point, either. Her mind may have flashed back upon the entire temptation. Why had she doubted the righteousness and benevolence of God? How could she have believed Satan's lie that God had somehow capriciously held something back from them? Did she think of how foolish she was to give in to the lust of the flesh? After all, didn't all of the fruit in the garden look good? Why had she convinced herself that she absolutely had to have it (lust of the eyes)? And what of her pride, which told her she needed it to be equal with God? But she blamed the serpent.

Perhaps all Christians would do well to ask this question to themselves after sinning grievously against God. The tendency is to blame someone else for our actions, and frequently someone else does have a part in which they serve as a stumbling block to us. But to ask, "What is this that I have done?", certifies a crucial concept we must acknowledge—our choices, our decisions, our actions have consequences. And God set forth the consequences for each participant in the sin: the serpent, the woman, and the man.

God would ask Cain a similar question in Genesis 4:10: "What have you done?" Although we will look at that question later, is it not the case that something final inheres in the word done? It's over, it's finished, it's completed. The action—whether good or evil—is done. Furthermore, it cannot be undone. How many times have people devoutly wished to take something said back—or erase a hurtful action—to no avail? "I wish I had it to do over again," people say. But no one gets a do-over (unless he dreamed it initially). How many adulterers wish they could undo the damage and have bemoaned what their actions cost? The time to avoid heartbreaking consequences is before they occur.

When Abraham said that Sarah was his sister, and Abimelech took her to his house, God told him he was a dead man unless he restored her to Abraham. He had acted in good faith, thinking she was his sister, and Abimelech was angry that he had been deceived. He asked Abraham:

"What have you done to us? How have I offended you, that you have brought on me and my kingdom a great sin? You have done deeds to me that ought not to be done…. What did you have in view, that you have done this thing?" (Gen. 20:9-10).

King Saul did things he should not have, also. Samuel was supposed to give a burnt offering and peace offerings before Israel went into battle. The men of the army were in danger and had begun to break ranks, hiding in caves and other places. Saul offered sacrifices instead. Afterward, Samuel came and spoke to Saul: "What have you done?" (1 Samuel 13:11). Needless to say, the rationale he offered for his actions did not alleviate him of his disobedience. His kingdom would not continue because of what he did. He did weigh the pros and cons of offering the sacrifices, but he made the wrong decision.

Even David erred in his judgment, which was affected by his lust. After having slept with another man's wife, which resulted in pregnancy, and then making certain that her husband died in battle, David was confronted by Nathan. His rebuke was stronger than, "What have you done?" Nathan did not mince words but asked an excruciating question: "Why have you despised the commandment of the Lord, to do evil in his sight?" Does anyone have a good answer? No one can offer justification but simply acknowledge, "I have sinned." Christians should strive diligently to never be asked that question.